A single judge of the Bombay High Court has referred to a larger Bench the question of whether Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act and its illustrations, which address grounds for revoking or annulling a will’s probate for “just cause,” are exhaustive. Justice Manish Pitale’s June 10 order raised three key questions regarding the interpretation of Section 263, seeking clarification on whether circumstances not explicitly covered in the section could still justify revocation.
The case involved a dispute over the probate of a will related to assets of Rajesh Chowdhary, who died in 2020. The probate was initially granted to the respondent after the petitioner’s caveat expired due to procedural issues. The petitioner contested the probate, arguing suspicious circumstances around the will’s execution and signing, which he claimed rendered the grant defective.
The respondent maintained that the grounds for revocation under Section 263 were exhaustive, citing previous judgments supporting this view. However, conflicting judgments from other courts suggested the explanations might be illustrative. Given these discrepancies, Justice Pitale referred the matter to a larger Bench for authoritative resolution and stayed the probate’s effect until the petition is fully heard.
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, Other Courts, International
